italiansport
Member
One only has to look at the origins of the ACLU to understand they DO NOT support the 2nd Amendment. I wonder just what their real motive is in supporting the NRA at this time?
Jim
Extreme Threat to the NRA!
- Thread starter Mike_Fontenot
- Start date
One only has to look at the origins of the ACLU to understand they DO NOT support the 2nd Amendment. I wonder just what their real motive is in supporting the NRA at this time?
Jim
This is not a Second Amendment issue, it's a First Amendment issue. The ACLU realizes that if a non profit can be punished for exercising it's First Amendment rights, a lot of issues that the ACLU does advocate will become impossible to support.
North made a side deal with the PR firm according to the articles I read.
ACLU? It's all optics. And a warning to NY state officials that they are crossing all sorts of lines that might hurt some of their (ACLU) faves as well.
ACLU? It's all optics. And a warning to NY state officials that they are crossing all sorts of lines that might hurt some of their (ACLU) faves as well.
Watchdog
Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2013
- Messages
- 12,511
- Reaction score
- 32,351
Let's clear this up (hopefully) once and for all. The ACLU has clearly stated its reasons for supporting the NRA in this case. It's a complicated case, and I won't go into all their reasons in this thread. You may read their position by clicking here.
One paragraph in their position paper jumps out at me, and I'll quote it here (the redaction is mine):
"If Cuomo can do this to the NRA, then [redacted] governors could have their financial regulators threaten banks and financial institutions that do business with any other group whose political views the governor opposes. The First Amendment bars state officials from using their regulatory power to penalize groups merely because they promote disapproved ideas."
I don't see any big ACLU conspiracy or hidden agendas here.
Plus, the ACLU's support of the NRA in the New York case, and their disagreements on the interpretation of the Second Amendment are totally different issues, and have nothing to do with the current internal struggles the NRA is going through.
500SNW
Member
Despite being a long time member, I nevertheless disagree with that statement. Membership...OR NOT...is everyone's choice. There are no greater or lesser gun owning Citizens...no "us and them" as far as the NRA goes. That's the one thing I've always disliked...sometimes gung ho NRA members talk more like labor union members....talking derisively about gun owners outside the organization. The Second Amendment was written for everyone, and not just those who donate money to some lobbying organization.
You are 100% correct. But a swelling membership gives the "impression" of overwhelming force. Sun Tzu knew that centuries ago and advised in it's proper use. Joe
500SNW
Member
Problem is, some have also equated an increase in membership with the swelling of their compensation packages.
Ever notice that, no matter how noble one's cause or charity...it always comes down to passing the hat around and asking for more money?
ancient-one
US Veteran
I really do not understand your position. If you value your right to own a firearm, you should be willing to join the fight against those trying to take away that right. No one is stating that they have to, just that they should. I don't see how that should be a problem.
500SNW
Member
The point is, anyone can join the fight by writing letters to their representatives, by voting wisely at the ballot box, by educating others...and I can safely assume that there are legions of card-carrying NRA members who probably do NONE of that. I know quite a few who fit that profile. But valuing your rights and joining with like-minded others shouldn't be entirely a case of "make check payable to..."
No one monopolizes a Constitutionally protected Right.
Last edited:
I would agree. NRA membership is a great first step. If you want to actually do something, participate in the democratic process. Note I said "participate"--not "vote". Votes mean little. A morning spent ringing doorbells or placing doorknob hangers in the name of a 2A-friendly municipal, county, or state candidate means A LOT.
Call their campaign a month or two before Election Day, ask where/how to volunteer. When you arrive, introduce yourself, and say:
*"I'm a member of [Your Gun Club Here]"
*"an NRA member"
*"I appreciate So-And-So's support of the Second Amendment"
Dealer's choice. Be subtle, the point will be made. The person who checks you in will be either the person in charge of doing the work that gets him/her elected, or have a direct line to the person that is. If anybody shows up to help out that isn't a member of the local machine, or on the patronage lists, it gets noticed immediately.
Last edited:
ancient-one
US Veteran
REa
Last edited:
I'm admittedly ignorant.......
...about this whole thing. Don't other's think that the problem can be resolved without the NRA imploding?
Who are the instigators, what are they trying to instigate and who needs to go. Doesn't the NRA publish it's on report of the the happenings and possible resolutions?
...about this whole thing. Don't other's think that the problem can be resolved without the NRA imploding?
Who are the instigators, what are they trying to instigate and who needs to go. Doesn't the NRA publish it's on report of the the happenings and possible resolutions?
Last edited:
History is written by the VICTORS
History is written by the VICTORS
Quote is snipped for brevity.
Bekeart
History is written by the VICTORS
Quote is snipped for brevity.
Bekeart
500SNW
Member
"Imploding" is a good word to describe the ultimate fate of the NRA...but not for the reasons discussed in the OP. I've always maintained that the demographics of the NRA membership is skewed heavily towards the over age 50 crowd. Let's face it, younger generations just aren't entering into the firearms hobby...and they just aren't joining in numbers sufficient to sustain the NRA for decades to come. While I haven't studied the history of the NRA, I do suspect that there was a "boom" in new members joining in the 1960's and 1970's. Those folks, like my own Father, are now in their 80's. Sadly, they will be leaving the organization in increasing numbers as time goes on. I personally, do not think new members will replace them at a rate sufficient to sustain the organization. JMHO.
There are plenty of young folks entering the shooting sports. The problem is that the over-50 crowd has alienated them at every turn.
For instance, every time one complains about "plastic" guns...well, younger folk like them because that's what they think they can afford. They frequently don't have the coin to splash out on a new revolver or steel-framed auto, don't realize used revolvers can be so good and inexpensive, and/or can't afford to spend $13/box on .38 Spl or the time investment it takes to reload.
GypsmJim
Member
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 4,061
- Reaction score
- 7,081
I think you're spot on. I have 2 sons - one is a master shooter and the other has other interests, none being shooting. But the gun toting son has no interest in joining the NRA or anything else for that matter.
I have many fiends that are ardent shooters and gun owners, but only a few have offspring that have taken up the hobby. I suspect for those, that when the time comes Dad's guns will be sold to the nearest legal gun shop.
So, what are we to do? I dunno...
Loss of membership is happening in all organizations. Lions,Mason's, etc. The young people do not have the time or interest. Their plate is REALLY full of different priorities. NRA membership ?. IMHO "WE" have to protect the 2nd Amendment any way we can, politically, money,etc.. GOD BLESS AMERICA.
500SNW
Member
One of the most effective things gun owners can do is to not patronize businesses, services, organizations etc. which have made public their anti-gun stances. Aside from NRA members there are millions of "other" gun owners...that's a lot of people and if all, as a lot, would boycott anti-gun businesses, that would get their attention real quick. IDK the stats, but I'm guessing most of us continue using these businesses. I know I had to ship a gun back to S&W recently, and they used FedEx...so what can ya do?
Naturally joining and/or donating isn't required in order to exercise one's rights. However, anyone who wants to KEEP those rights beyond this generation, NEEDS to become a member AND start contributing.
5% of us have been carrying all the water for the 95% who won't or don't for a lot of years - and we aren't getting any younger.
